They took out the WiFi antenna. That's basically like taking out a device using USB in your computer. It's pretty minimal configuration work for Apple, despite the fact that the government forced them to exclude WiFi from their phones initially.

It's a different phone for a different market. Once Apple made a different phone for a different market, you can't use the argument anymore that they wouldn't do that. Now you're reduced to saying "Apple will spend $X to custom design a phone for a customer, but won't spend $Y". Unfortunately, THAT argument is a lot flimsier than the "only one iPhone" argument.

How much would Apple spend? Well, you'd assume they'd spend less than they'd make. So how much would they make? Well, Verizon has about 100 million subscribers, and in the USA, Apple has sold over 10 million iPhones to ATT users. I'd say that assuming half that number sold to Verizon would be very conservative. 5 million times $500 per phone = $2.5 billion in revenue. At a profit margin of 50% that's 1.25 billion in profit. Do you think it would cost $1.25 billion to make the changes to the iPhone to make it CDMA? That's a pretty tough thing to imagine, don't you think?

Not saying it's going to happen, just saying that financially it's very easy to justify.

So if something costs $30 more, and Verizon pays $60 more for it, doesn't Apple's margin stay the same? (I have an economics degree, it's a rhetorical question)

Don’t forget this article reads that all iPhones would get the same HW. Even if we make the entire US, that means that Verizon has to pay for AT&T’s and maybe other carrier’s too, including the additional 5.5% licensing fee on the gross profit of the device. That makes this rumor seem very unlikely, IMO.

(too many threads to read all the back posts so if your comment was in response to something else, then my apologies)

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

With the WiFi ban about to be lifted I would expect that a driver and UI update will add the feature. I doubt that Apple re-engineered the logic board to remove the WiFi Chip, especially considering that the WiFI chip also contains BlueTooth+EDR+FM.

iPhonasia.com had someone examine the current China iPhone and it really is missing wifi hardware. They also reported a rumor that another version with the wifi hardware included is already in the works and will be for sale as soon as the ban ends.

I know that HTC's phones for both Verizon and Sprint are now Dual CDMA-EVDO/GSM-HSPA devices. And they use some sort of qualcomm chipset. However, it would cost Apple more at first as the global HTC GSM-HSPA unlocked versions as well as the branded AT&T and T-Mobile version are strictly GSM-HSPA and contain no CDMA-EVDO parts.

It would be frankly easier and make more sense to just add T-Mobile's 3G band and sell thru T-Mobile. It would be cheaper and be more useful in the future as AWS (the band T-Mobile uses for HSPA 3G) will probably be licensed out in Canada and South America as well and is already considered a potential LTE spectrum.

As I wrote in another thread, adding Verizon is Apple's trump card that they can play when the time is right. Maybe next July is the right time.

Also, there is a large market segment, people with smaller hands (think women primarily), who would like a smaller iPhone. Apple didn't make one before because they couldn't squeeze everything in, but maybe now they can. A 480x320 resolution on a 2.8" display isn't that bad, and the keyboard would still be usable for people with small hands. Of course, it would run all the apps unchanged. And it would be an additional model, not the only model.

iPhonasia.com had someone examine the current China iPhone and it really is missing wifi hardware. They also reported a rumor that another version with the wifi hardware included is already in the works and will be for sale as soon as the ban ends.

Do you have a link that explains the removable and states what the new Bluetooth+EDR chip make and model number are?

If you look at the diagram below you see that the WiFi is part of the Bluetooth chip and it connects with the GPS transceiver. Re-engineering this would not be an easy task. If they had to make HW changes removing the antenna, as mentioned earlier in the thread, may be enough to satisfy the ban. Of course the UI elements and drivers would not be included either.

Why would I want to move to Verizon? Their "unlimited" data plan has a limit of 5GB/mo. If I want to add tethering, I need to add another "unlimited" data plan (with another limit of 5GB/mo) for another $30. So, that gives me 2 "unlimited" data plans for $60/mo.

With Verizon, I risk paying a $350 termination fee if I want to cancel my plan.

Also, I am unable to make calls and access the internet at the same time (a CDMA restriction) and there are no plans to increase the speed. You have to wait until 4G is completely rolled out for faster access....many years away.

Even though there is much to complain about AT&T, at least they have the EDGE (2.75G) as a backup to 3G. The EDGE is 100% functionally equivalent to a 3G network (data and voice access at the same time)....only slower. AT&T will also roll out 7.2mbs and then 14mbs over the next few months. So at least they have an intermediate step until 4G is deployed.

B.S. The next phone will be LTE capable for 4G roll out, not CMDA enabled.

It's not as if Verizon's entire network is going to flip a switch and instantly convert from 3G to LTE. Verizon's network is going to have to keep supporting older phones. And newer phones are going to need to be able to operate on the older CDMA network (or else have even poorer coverage than ATT).

So Verizon is going to to need phones that support both, therefore someone is going to have to make chips that support the legacy CDMA standard in addition to the 4G network. A phone that supports only 4G would be an ultimate fail for many years until 4G completely supplants the 3G network.

If this UMTS/CDMA hybrid chip is real, it would be a reasonable stepping stone to an LTE/CDMA chip. I just hope it supports CDMA 2000 1X Advance, which was recently approved. This would allow Verizon to make a relatively minor upgrade to their CDMA network and enable simultaneous voice/data.

I think its only inevitable. Apple cannot ignore 90 million customers forever. That's too much money left on the table.
.

There's nothing physically stopping those 90 million customers moving to a GSM/UMTS based network. There is however something stopping the most of the world moving to a CDMA network (in that, they don't exist in too many places).

Of course Apple would only do it if they can have a GSM/CDMA chip that does not significantly add to the cost. Verizon won't be finished with CDMA for some years to come. At the same time Verizon as a lot of valuable customers that Apple does not currently have direct access to.

I don't know if it will happen next year, but it will inevitably happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChickenHawk

There's nothing physically stopping those 90 million customers moving to a GSM/UMTS based network. There is however something stopping the most of the world moving to a CDMA network (in that, they don't exist in too many places).

Of course Apple would only do it if they can have a GSM/CDMA chip that does not significantly add to the cost. Verizon won't be finished with CDMA for some years to come. At the same time Verizon as a lot of valuable customers that Apple does not currently have direct access to.
.

Course they have direct access... They're welcome to walk into an apple store or AT&T store and switch network at any time. Don't know about over there, but over here its not that much harder than resigning your current contract with a new handset.

Nothing is stopping those 90 million customers doing that. If they really want that phone, they just have to buy it just like all the other customers that switched over.

The real killer for this story is could be the reduction in ATT subsidies if the iPhone once it stops being exclusive. ATT pays something like $400/phone now. If Verizon gets access to the phone, ATT could reduce the subsidy by $100-200 from the $400/iPhone.

Add to this the GOBAL increase in the BOM of around $30+ extra royalties to QCOM it addition to what is paid to the UMTS royalty pool. QCOM normally charges 5.5% royalties on CDMA phones, but lets assume they reduce that by half since they also get a share via UMTS. That is an extra $15-30.

Incremental cost could go up to $50/phone WORLDWIDE just to grab a marginal amount of CDMA users in the US and a few other places like Korea. Add the damage of reduction in ATT subsidies and it does not make sense. Neither does the small screen and tinny keyboard on screen keyboard.

Sounds like an Android Verizon shill story. Somebody is reading too much into Sun Tzu.

The transceiver is scheduled to sample this quarter, the chipset (adds GPS, Bluetooth, FM radio) in "mid-2010". That would mean Apple either gets early access or the next generation iPhones introduction would be sligthly later in the year in 2010 if they'd use the chipset (so its use is unlikely, IMO). As of now Broadcom and Infineon supply the GPS, BT and FM chips, so only the transceiver would need to be replaced for the successor of the 3Gs and the timeline for integration into the iPhone would match quite good.

The chipset, as the first link address reveals, would also support LTE, and-taking away ATTs advertising advantage stated in the article-"Simultaneous Voice-Data Operation (SV-DO)", which would also benefit Apple in not having to differentiate the marketing (as in "works on UMTS but not CDMA", still, no word about conferencing).

But still it remains to be seen if this is the solution Apple will be using for its next iPhone (3Gm for multi-radio..?)

After all the crap Verizon's been throwing at the iPhone lately, I seriously doubt Jobs is going to give them the iPhone. You don't think Jobs will hold a grudge? Trust me, I think we'll see the return of the Newton before Verizon gets an iPhone.

Me too! Especially with their new talk, txt, data plans that cut the cost in half of what one pays with AT&T.

Hey, you get what you pay for. T-Mobile in my area is just plain awful. My brother-in-law and sister were on T-Mobile before getting iPhones and it was virtually impossible to have a phone conversation with them because of coverage issues. I know many can say the same about AT&T, but we've got excellent coverage here in NJ.

A 54.5% margin isn't the same as a 60% margin given this scenario. What did the Psychology degree teach the Economic degree this evening (other than I have to much time on my hands)?

Um... you taught me that if you change the fixed values in an equation, that the results will change too? Very impressive! Ha! Stick to psychology, leave even basic math to others.

Just so I don't leave you wondering, what you did is change the assumed profit margin to 60% from 50%. Of course the required price increase is different if you're going for a different margin. Does this really make you think you did something? Hilarious...

Even though there is much to complain about AT&T, at least they have the EDGE (2.75G) as a backup to 3G. The EDGE is 100% functionally equivalent to a 3G network (data and voice access at the same time)....only slower.

It's nonsense. A smaller screen size would affect all 100,000 apps currently for sale in the App Store.

I don't understand this, why the false dichotomy? It seems you're leaving another option off the table that should be obvious. Don't you know that screens can also be made at a higher PPI? The same number of dots can fit on a slightly smaller screen. That would mean that it would have absolutely no impact on app support.

90 million people don't want to do that. Switching to AT&T is not direct access.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChickenHawk

Course they have direct access... They're welcome to walk into an apple store or AT&T store and switch network at any time. Don't know about over there, but over here its not that much harder than resigning your current contract with a new handset.

Nothing is stopping those 90 million customers doing that. If they really want that phone, they just have to buy it just like all the other customers that switched over.

I don't understand this, why the false dichotomy? It seems you're leaving another option off the table that should be obvious. Don't you know that screens can also be made at a higher PPI? The same number of dots can fit on a slightly smaller screen. That would mean that it would have absolutely no impact on app support.

The ability to display of the apps on a different sized screen isn the issue, its the ability for ut to be as effectively. if text is now smaller it can be harder to read. If input have shrunk and are now closer together they will be harder to use.

I think the 3.5 display at this ration is the minimum screen size Apple will use for future iPhones. Now, we look at the iPod model, a smaller handheld is in order after the market is saturated, but it would have to be a different UI to deal with the smaller size.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I don't know about a mini-iPhone, but the silicon they're talking about in the report already is available: the Qualcomm Gobi. Qualcomm I am sure would love to sell a few million Gobi's, and Apple would love a true worldphone they can distribute as a single SKU in their product catalog.

I could be wrong, but I believe the RIM Storm 2 already uses a Gobi baseband, its how they could keep the Storm a world phone, throw in wi-fi, and have the battery last longer than an hour.

Do you have a link that explains the removable and states what the new Bluetooth+EDR chip make and model number are?

If you look at the diagram below you see that the WiFi is part of the Bluetooth chip and it connects with the GPS transceiver. Re-engineering this would not be an easy task. If they had to make HW changes removing the antenna, as mentioned earlier in the thread, may be enough to satisfy the ban. Of course the UI elements and drivers would not be included either.

After reading it however, I'm not sure they're correct. The China iPhone (model A1324) still uses the layout for the older Marvell 88W8686 wifi and CSR bluetooth combo from the 3G, instead of the Broadcom BCM 4325 wifi/bluetooth combo in the 3GS. But in the picture they show, one can't tell that the Marvell wifi chip is not there. Maybe you can tell. (See step 20 at http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone-3G/600/3 for the US 3G).

After reading it however, I'm not sure they're correct. The China iPhone (model A1324) still uses the layout for the older Marvell 88W8686 wifi and CSR bluetooth combo from the 3G, instead of the Broadcom BCM 4325 wifi/bluetooth combo in the 3GS. But in the picture they show, one can't tell that the Marvell wifi chip is not there. Maybe you can tell. (See step 20 at http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone-3G/600/3 for the US 3G).

I hadnt thought that China would be getting the 3G model instead of the 3GS. Ill check out the link later. Thanks.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

This image from iFixit seems a little ambiguous. It appears to show one chip, but the Marvell 88W8686 is clearly for WiFI, so if Bluetooth was included it would have have need to separate out Bluetooth. “Marvell 88W8686 802.11a/b/g + Bluetooth” is what I would have expected.

To make it even more convoluted I found this

Quote:

It is interesting to note that while both the Marvell 88W8686 and the CSR Bluecore 4 die are found separately on the iPhone, they are again bundled as a WLAN and Bluetooth system-in-package (SiP) solution in the Wi2Wi W2CBW003. The Marvell 88W8686 device provides for both traditional bond wires as well as flip-chip packaging options to allow the form factor of the SoC to be as small as possible depending on the users specific bonding requirements. (source)

So I have no idea and hope someone will crack open their overpriced Chinese iPhone to show us.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"